Firstly, I very nearly didn't buy the book because of your review! It was only because there were so many reviews which contradicted your opinions that I decided to give it a chance. And now I'm very glad that I did, as I found this book to be quite brilliant and definitely worth reading. Having said as much, I must now address your review with certain disagreement.
It is a very unfair criticism to disparage this book on the basis of any US bias: From what I've read so far it is very clear to me that much of what he has written has universal dimensions and connotations which are not only most interesting but quite impossible not to ponder further. It is, in other words, more of an excellent read than your review gives it credit. And, I write this as a European with an interest in behavioural economics which is far greater than my interest in US affairs.
Your criticise him for his not pondering further the results of his experiments which again is quite an unfounded criticism; insofar as the point of an experiment is to test a hypothesis and then make conclusions from same before moving on to a new experiment.
Within the first chapter it is already clear that at least one experiment is repeated and its results re-tested so it is most incorrect to say that "none is[sic - you surely mean to write 'are...'] repeated". Frankly, I am surprised that so many found your review helpful when (sorry to say...) to my eyes it seems to miss the point of the book more than most of the reviews here.